A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who
show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own
sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed
irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been
repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality.

The symptoms of this preoccupation are well known: an inclination to
attach enormous significance to audio equipment's capacity to induce
sonic pleasure and an inordinate emphasis on the sensuality of the
reproduced sound, with a consequent tendency to relegate the music
itself to a secondary position. We can also recognize in this
obsessional interest a need to amplify very small differences between
audio components out of all proportion to their true value. These
audiophiles are prone to convert such differences into preferences,
and institute them as rigid ideals.

It is easy enough to dismiss the lunatic fringe. but it is more
important to try to understand it. With this purpose in mind I wish to
undertake a brief analysis of the psychology of this group of
audiophiles.

I know that some readers may feel uneasy with psychology intruding
upon the sphere of musical reproduction, but perhaps they can reassure
themselves with the thought that psychological knowledge has been
partly responsible for bringing some 'sanity' into the controlled
subjective assessment of hi-fi equipment. What is more, techniques
evolved in the psychological laboratory have been useful in solving a
variety of psychoacoustical problems. However, while these
applications have been primarily directed at the perception of
reproduced music and speech, I am proposing now that we focus our
attention on some aspects of the personality of this special group of
audiophiles.

Naturally this kind of investigation will require a different approach
and I expect some readers will find the topic under discussion
unfamiliar. But I have made every effort to draw upon our common
experiences of musical reproduction in arguing my case.

Some of you will wonder how I have collected my data, but discretion
requires that I say little. I can tell you that I have had discussions
with members of this group and have also observed auditioning sessions
with some of these people. In addition, I have examined the linguistic
content of their magazines.

For most of us, listening to a chosen disc would involve placing the
record on a turntable and making the audio equipment operational.
Thereafter we are free to listen - our focus of attention is on the
music. Our attention may drawn away from the music by the reproduction
of an unexpected pressing defect, which may prove irritating
temporarily; but we accommodate to this nuisance and re-establish the
original focus of attention.

Another sort of non-musical sound may prove more disturbing. For
instance, our attention may be drawn away from the music by a loud hum
issuing from the loudspeakers. Perhaps this is due to an electrical
fault in one of our components, and as it is more difficult to
tolerate this kind of disturbance, the faulty component may have to be
repaired in order to restore our musical pleasure.

In quite a different situation we may actually choose to weaken our
attention to the music and shift the focus to some characteristics of
an audio component. I am thinking of the situation in which one would
audition a selection of loudspeakers with the aim of making a
purchase, when some models may produce disturbing colorations or other
undesirable sounds. At times such as these, listening to the music,
while still the main justification of our activity, is relegated to a
subordinate position. The audible characteristics of the equipment are
the matter at hand, and it is these that we judge. We search for
differences and try to establish preferences.

I am citing these examples in order to underline the common basis of
all listeners' responses to musical reproduction. We should recognize
that the relationship between our listening to music and our listening
to the characteristic sound of audio equipment is not a constant one.
It can shift if the circumstances demand it, but it is clear that
members of the lunatic fringe have shifted an unusually large
proportion of their attention over to the audio equipment.

This shift is not a temporary one. It is long-term. For this group of
audiophiles hi-fi equipment does not merely serve the purpose of
listening through, rather it has also become something to listen to.
We can say that members of this group have relegated the music itself
to a position of lesser prominence. This view is further justified on
the basis of additional evidence: the lunatic fringe insist that their
access to musical pleasure is dependent on the special characteristics
of the audio equipment that they own or aspire to own. It is as if the
real aim of musical reproduction, to listen to an account of a musical
composition, is displaced. It is displaced onto an object (the audio
equipment) which becomes at least as important a source of pleasure
for the listener. I will refer to this phenomenon as hi-fi fetishism.

I feel fully justified in employing a term which derives its meaning
from an extreme form of sexual behaviour; but I am sure you need to be
convinced of the applicability of this nomenclature. Typically, a
fetishist is someone who has endowed an inanimate object (eg a piece
of underclothing, a high-heeled shoe) with sexual significance. He or
she requires the presence of this fetish in order to become sexually
aroused, and this is the case regardless of whether a human subject is
present. Sexual pleasure is entirely dependent on the fetish.

This form of sexual behaviour, while no doubt extreme, is really a
gross amplification of normal responses. We are all capable of
investing an inanimate object with sexual significance, but what has
happened for the fetishist is that the usual source of sexual
pleasure, another human being, is replaced by an object which itself
becomes the source of pleasure.

In the case of the hi-fi fetishist the true object of his pleasure.
the music, has been displaced. Or to put it another way, this pleasure
has become dependent upon the particular characteristics of the audio
equipment. This is not to suggest that the hi-fi fetishist likes music
less, it is simply that a shift of attention has placed the emotional
and perceptual priority firmly on the audio equipment. This accounts
for the equipment's transformation into a fetish.

We observed that the sexual fetishist endows an inanimate object with
powers not normally assigned to it. Thus without any alteration in its
real nature that object is aggrandized and exalted. It has magical
powers assigned to it which resonate on a level of fantasy in the mind
of the fetishist. I think it is possible to explain the hi-fi
fetishist's attitude of over-estimation and over-valuation by recourse
to the same process of idealization. Look at it this way. A piece of
music we love will have the power to move us whether we hear it
reproduced via a music-centre or a high quality system; this is the
power of art. Indeed, many of us may describe this encounter with the
music as magical. But what happens in the case of the hi-fi fetishist
who has shifted the psychological priority from the music to the
reproducing equipment? Musical pleasure (as with sexual pleasure)
becomes dependent on the magical properties of the fetish, the audio
equipment. But audio components do not possess any magical properties
- they are under the control of the laws of physics.

Like the sexual fetishist, the hi-fi fetishist cannot fully bend to
the demands of reality for the simple reason that his relationship to
the fetish is active on a level of fantasy. Of course, the hi-fi
fetishist is not completely out of touch with reality, otherwise he
would need to deny the existence of the laws of physics. Therefore, in
order to 'accommodate' his magical thinking to reality he modifies it
so that he can still enjoy the pleasure afforded to him by his hi-fi
system. We see these modifications appearing in the hi-fi press in the
form of mystification. This reconstituted form of magical thinking is
transparent to all those who are not under its power, but for those
who are, it is very convincing.

The form that this mystifying language takes is quite evocative, which
it must be in order to maintain the imaginary intensity of the fetish
under review. The characteristics of this language are well known:
they are ambiguous. motoric, sensual. Here are four examples. Notice
the way the audio equipment is assigned a fetishistic value: it can
excite and arouse emotion, or fail to do so.

Pay attention to the implied sensuality and physicality. No doubt you
will recognize the tendency toward over-estimation. Finally, try to
bear in mind that the fetishist can no longer sustain a normal
relationship to music but needs audio equipment of a certain kind to
allow him access to musical pleasure. (I have retained the anonymity
of the following selected samples, but they are representative of some
of the popular British hi-fi press. Brand names have been edited out.)

But given the right amp and speakers, the speed and dynamics of
xyz mean that a whole gamut of musical emotions can be reproduced.

Speed... is very difficult to put into words. The speed of a
system has an effect on the overall perspective with which it is
perceived and the level of excitement it can generate...

The transformation of sound when switching to the xyz was mind-
blowing. The improvements in bass tightness and detail, imagery and
general low-level detail resolution was of such a magnitude as to make
confirmatory A-B listening tests redundant and pointless.... [With
this pickup arm] more emotion in vocals and in musical expression was
obvious, and it became far easier to get into the music.

My conclusion after listening was that xyz was more capable of
conveying intangible things like the degree of commitment displayed by
musicians in a performance...

At this stage I think we can claim to have a better understanding of
the hi-fi fetishist's special relationship to his audio equipment. Yet
we need to go a little deeper than this to appreciate fully the
psychological importance of the fetish.

Let us turn to the sphere of sexual fetishism again in order to get
our bearings. As we have observed, the fetishist has difficulty in
functioning in a normal sexual manner; his natural responses have been
distorted. He cannot establish a sexual relationship with another
person unless it is mediated by the fetish, and sexual arousal is
dependent on the fetish. This indicates, and clinical studies confirm
this, that the fetishist feels sexually inadequate in the presence of
a human subject. Being under his control, the fetish does not pose
this threat to its owner, and thus allows to him the potency he would
otherwise lack.

Before I begin building the bridge between this feature of sexual
fetishism and hi-fi fetishism I must cite a few more familiar
examples, otherwise what I have to say may meet with strong
opposition. I am sure we are familiar with a particular remark that
reviewers sometimes make at the conclusion of their test reports.
Having assessed an excellent audio component which is outside their
own financial reach, they say that they are sorry to see it go. While
the professional reviewer is fully aware of the component's virtues he
does not feel compelled to purchase it - because reality, financial
reality, is a major consideration.

As we would expect, financial realities are not handled with such
objectivity by members of the lunatic fringe. Should a very expensive
'better' component come onto the market they will somehow find the
means to acquire it. For example, upon the appearance of a new and
very expensive audiophile product a fetishist remarked: 'If it is
better I'll have to buy it'. This continual search for perfection, or
'up-grading' as it is sometimes called, can lead to financial
disaster. Under severe pressure from debts many a member of the
lunatic fringe has been forced to sell his highly prized system.

From our observations of the lamenting reviewer we can predict the
reaction of the hi-fi fetishist to separation from his audio
equipment. Of course, in the latter case the stakes are higher;
consequently, the sense of loss is far greater. He describes his
feelings as depression, a sense of emptiness, depletion, etc. Do not
be surprized by the depth of his feelings. Have we not observed that
the fetishist maintains his relationship to the equipment on a level
of fantasy? We should, therefore, expect the same fantasy relationship
to operate in his separation from the fetish.

One more bit of evidence would be in order before I present my final
interpretation. We all know how hi-fi fetishists defend their choice
of components tenaciously. For example, writing in the hi-fi press a
'reviewer' may aggrandise and exalt a piece of audio equipment. He
insinuates that his fetish is 'better' or 'best', assuming its
superiority and implicitly demeaning any competing products. What is
also evident here is a wish to be envied for the possession of an
idealized object. One can even discern a sense of triumph (see the
letters of Mr. Ted Meyer, HFN/RR April 1980). However, I have observed
that when a fetishist discovers that someone else's equipment is
superior, his reaction is akin to narcissistic injury.

We are now in a much better position to understand the psychological
significance of the hi-fi fetish. I would like to suggest that the
fetishist treats the fetish as an extension of himself. To be more
accurate, we should say that the fetish is a representation of his
ideal self. Does the fetish not give him the powers he would like to
have? Does it not lend him the authority he needs? Surely his
passionate claims for sonic superiority and audio perfectionism
confirm this; as do his establishment of rigid ideals. Indeed, he
tenaciously defends his choice of equipment because he measures his
ego against this ideal. Thus the hi-fi equipment acts as a mirror to
the ideal self.

No doubt you are still wondering why it is that among audiophiles only
some become fetishists, while the majority remain mere enthusiasts.
Here generalizations about psychological dispositions become more
difficult, but perhaps one can go a little way toward a solution by
examining the effects of fetishistic publicity in the hi-fi press. As
I see it, this publicity - in the form of reviews and test reports as
well as paid advertising - is partly responsible for leading young
people into the lunatic fringe. Study shows that this publicity begins
by working on one's natural appetite for pleasure. But the pleasure it
appeals to is the pleasure of ownership. While musical pleasure is
held to be the ultimate aim, this kind of publicity really glorifies
the pleasure of having a certain audio component. It proposes to offer
us something better, something better than we have now, and this way
it works on our insecurity or doubt and sets up an insidious form of
envy.

As we would expect, rational assessment can do very little against
such feelings; it is a poor weapon against the mystifications of
fetishistic publicity. I might add that manufacturers who allow
themselves to be exalted and aggrandized by fetishists in the same
manner as their products are doing themselves a disservice. For they
too are indulging in a form of narcissistic gratification and are
lending yet further credibility to the lunatic fringe.

From Hi-Fi News and Record Review, October 1981

http://www.heretical.com/miscella/zfetish.html

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 7, 9:59 am, "9/11 Wasn't Real" wrote:

Are your eyes brown? Do you even have eyes?

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 7, 7:59 am, "9/11 Wasn't Real" wrote:
Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who
show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own
sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed
irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been
repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality.


The same observation could be held for those into photography
(equipment), cars, skiing, woodworking, etc. There must be some basic
human need to attach significance to objects beyond what can be
observed in the physical realm. Perhaps it's simpler than that: people
wish to buy things that they can't attain some other way. In the photo
newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique
groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the
merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the
difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc.

Karl

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Karl Winkler" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 7, 7:59 am, "9/11 Wasn't Real" wrote:
Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who
show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own
sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed
irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been
repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality.


The same observation could be held for those into photography
(equipment), cars, skiing, woodworking, etc. There must be some basic
human need to attach significance to objects beyond what can be
observed in the physical realm. Perhaps it's simpler than that: people
wish to buy things that they can't attain some other way. In the photo
newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique
groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the
merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the
difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc.

Karl

It could be worse, I could have a computer equipment fetish. I would go
broke much faster just trying to keep up with the latest and greatest. I am
still using the stereo system I got in 1987, which still out performs
current comparable offerrings atmo.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"9/11 Wasn't Real" wrote in message
oups.com...
Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who
show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own
sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed
irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been
repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality.



Interesting article. I work at an A/V consulting firm and we have a
relatively hard-core audiophile on staff. He recently brought in a Monster
power-conditioner and demoed it for some of the staff in the office, stating
afterwards that we should begin specifying it on all our projects. While
such equipment can help in specific situations he obviously didn't
understand the theory behind its operation. Fortunately he's a great
salesman (his position is sales) and he doesn't do any design work.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Karl Winkler" wrote in message
oups.com

The same observation could be held for those into
photography (equipment), cars, skiing, woodworking, etc.

To varying degrees. Add Golf.

There must be some basic human need to attach
significance to objects beyond what can be observed in
the physical realm.

Rather readily observable in Shinto and other similar religions.

Also observable in some forms of Christianity, examples being so-called holy
relics, etc.

Perhaps it's simpler than that:
people wish to buy things that they can't attain some
other way.

Buying takes mere money as opposed to interaction or commitment.

In the photo newsgroups, equipment is
discussed endlessly while the .technique groups see very
little activity.

Not so much that way in Video groups, particuarly those related to video
editing.

Clearly, it's easier to discuss the
merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really
makes the difference: the recording or photography
techniques, etc.

Seems like there is some balance between those influences in RAP.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"David Grant" wrote ...
Interesting article. I work at an A/V consulting firm and we have a
relatively hard-core audiophile on staff. He recently brought in a Monster
power-conditioner and demoed it for some of the staff in the office,
stating afterwards that we should begin specifying it on all our projects.
While such equipment can help in specific situations he obviously didn't
understand the theory behind its operation. Fortunately he's a great
salesman (his position is sales) and he doesn't do any design work.

Salesmen seem to be more easily duped by other salesmen.
You'd think they would be more clued-in to the deceptive practices,
but maybe they are in denial. :-)

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message

"David Grant" wrote ...

Interesting article. I work at an A/V consulting firm
and we have a relatively hard-core audiophile on staff.
He recently brought in a Monster power-conditioner and
demoed it for some of the staff in the office, stating
afterwards that we should begin specifying it on all our
projects. While such equipment can help in specific
situations he obviously didn't understand the theory
behind its operation. Fortunately he's a great salesman
(his position is sales) and he doesn't do any design
work.

Salesmen seem to be more easily duped by other salesmen.
You'd think they would be more clued-in to the deceptive
practices, but maybe they are in denial. :-)

IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them have a
strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad thing, as one
can know too much to be an effective salesman.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 7, 2:11 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
Salesmen seem to be more easily duped by other salesmen.
You'd think they would be more clued-in to the deceptive practices,
but maybe they are in denial. :-)

Old joke: What's the difference between a computer salesman and a used
car salesman? The used car salesman knows that he's lying.

Tim.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Arny Krueger"


IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them have
a strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad thing, as
one can know too much to be an effective salesman.


** Just like having a conscience or any empathy would get in the way of
being an effective Nazi ?




........ Phil

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

You should know.

"Phil Allison" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger"


IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them
have a strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad
thing, as one can know too much to be an effective salesman.


** Just like having a conscience or any empathy would get in the way of
being an effective Nazi ?




....... Phil

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:16:28 +1100, Mark Ilsley wrote:
"Phil Allison" wrote in message
snipped

You should know.


Do you find that the "no I'm not, but you are" argument works well around
your circle of friends?

Most people find that it quits working by around the time they get into
junior high school.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

9/11 Wasn't Real wrote:

Yeah, all that **** that blew up in New York was a ****in' cartoon, right?

You asshole.

My conclusion after listening was that xyz was more capable of
conveying intangible things like the degree of commitment displayed by
musicians in a performance...

BwahahahahahahHAH!

The jerk who wrote that is as dumb as you are.

LV

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 7, 6:04 pm, Lord Valve wrote:
9/11 Wasn't Real wrote:

Yeah, all that **** that blew up in New York was a ****in' cartoon, right?

You asshole.

My conclusion after listening was that xyz was more capable of
conveying intangible things like the degree of commitment displayed by
musicians in a performance...

BwahahahahahahHAH!

The jerk who wrote that is as dumb as you are.

LV

Valvey... Valvey... Valvey

This jackass is searching for a nibble. My response was to attempt to
ascertain the sh*t-level-by-eye-color... Dumb, not hardly. Pulling
various and sundry chains... precisely.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"9/11 Wasn't Real" wrote in message
oups.com...

Many of us are becoming increasingly aware of those audiophiles who
show an extraordinary preoccupation with hi-fi equipment for its own
sake. Contributors to as well as readers of HFN/RR have expressed
irritation with this so-called lunatic fringe, which has been
repeatedly criticized for being out of touch with reality.

snip most of this post for brevity's sake

As we would expect, rational assessment can do very little against
such feelings; it is a poor weapon against the mystifications of
fetishistic publicity. I might add that manufacturers who allow
themselves to be exalted and aggrandized by fetishists in the same
manner as their products are doing themselves a disservice. For they
too are indulging in a form of narcissistic gratification and are
lending yet further credibility to the lunatic fringe.

From Hi-Fi News and Record Review, October 1981
http://www.heretical.com/miscella/zfetish.html

A precised version of this post, albeit somewhat tongue in cheek, can be had
by listening to Flanders' & Swan's song 'High Fidelity'.
Can't remember whether it's on their first album, 'At the Drop of a Hat' or
on their second, 'At the Drop of Another Hat'. Sorry.

ruff

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

In this case, who needs to make an argument.

(p.s. Death to all bottom posters and Phil-o-philes)

"AZ Nomad" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:16:28 +1100, Mark Ilsley
wrote:
"Phil Allison" wrote in message
snipped

You should know.


Do you find that the "no I'm not, but you are" argument works well around
your circle of friends?

Most people find that it quits working by around the time they get into
junior high school.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"AZ Nomad" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:16:28 +1100, Mark Ilsley
wrote:

"Phil Allison" wrote in message

snipped

You should know.

Do you find that the "no I'm not, but you are" argument works well around
your circle of friends?

Most people find that it quits working by around the time they get into
junior high school.

If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on aus.hi-fi's circle
of friends, either you don't know him very well or the circle you're
referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less.
Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has used the term
'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at some time or other,
and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject.

ruff

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"roughplanet" wrote in
message
...
::
: If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on
aus.hi-fi's circle
: of friends, either you don't know him very well or the
circle you're
: referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less.
: Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has
used the term
: 'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at
some time or other,
: and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject.
:
: ruff
:
I wish to invoke Godwin's Law ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law

BTW it's directed at you Ruff BUT the first person who
mentioned it i.e. Philthy.

Cheers TT

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"TT" wrote in message
...

"roughplanet" wrote in message
...
:
: If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on aus.hi-fi's
circle
: of friends, either you don't know him very well or the circle you're
: referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less.
: Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has used the term
: 'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at some time or
other,
: and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject.

I wish to invoke Godwin's Law ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law

BTW it's directed at you Ruff BUT the first person who
mentioned it i.e. Philthy.

How appropriate. Godwin must know Philthy pretty well :-).

ruff

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

In article .com,
Karl Winkler wrote:
In the photo
newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique
groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the
merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the
difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc.

First of all, most buyers of hi-fi equipment are limited to just
reproduction of what somebody else has recorded. Just about the only
creative input is which track to play next.

However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much
easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example,
photography techniques.

And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music
or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion
may not go anywhere.

So in the end, it is quite possible that equipment oriented forums will
see the most activity.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Philip Homburg" wrote in message
.phicoh.net
In article
.com,
Karl Winkler wrote:
In the photo
newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the
.technique groups see very little activity. Clearly,
it's easier to discuss the merits of equipment rather
than to focus on what really makes the difference: the
recording or photography techniques, etc.

First of all, most buyers of hi-fi equipment are limited
to just reproduction of what somebody else has recorded.
Just about the only creative input is which track to play
next.

Agreed.

However, my guess is that for the technically inclined
people it is much easier to talk about features of
equipment than to talk about, for example, photography
techniques.

Anybody can recite the name of some new expensive piece of equipment and
write poetry about it. You actually have to understand what you are doing to
credibly discuss technique.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 7, 2:22 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

IME, salemen as a rule just don't know any better. Only a few of them have a
strong background in tech. I'm not sure this is *always* a bad thing, as one
can know too much to be an effective salesman.


Add "honest" and your premise stands.

In my opinion, the OP chooses simply not to get it. Writing for
myself, I have a disproportionate amount of audio equipment about the
house, and were it not for my twice-yearly purges at the Kutztown
Vintage Radio meet, I would be over my ears (and divorced) in short
order. Put simply, audio equipment is great good fun. Its
permutations, combinations, differences and similarities while not
endless are certainly entertaining if one has that turn-of-mind. And
in my case after nearly 40 years of dabbling (started in my early
teens), I am slowly starting down the murky home-brew path.

Furthermore, the poor fools as described by the OP are few and far
between. Enough to support an industry certainly. But that is not
surprising given the total population. Some get into the esoteric
because they can. A perfectly valid position and by no means
indicative of a fetish. Some do so because that aspect of the hobby
does not require any sort of basis in fact or practice and so they may
spout endless babble without challenge. Also no indication of a
fetish. Some even make a living at it. Certainly no fetish there.

I would posit that the OP's fascination with its chosen target is just
as indicative of a fetish as its target's purported behavior.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 8, 1:36 am, (Philip Homburg) wrote:
In article .com,

Karl Winkler wrote:
In the photo
newsgroups, equipment is discussed endlessly while the .technique
groups see very little activity. Clearly, it's easier to discuss the
merits of equipment rather than to focus on what really makes the
difference: the recording or photography techniques, etc.

First of all, most buyers of hi-fi equipment are limited to just
reproduction of what somebody else has recorded. Just about the only
creative input is which track to play next.

However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker
placement, acoustical treatments, etc. But instead, they talk mostly
about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like
with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and
brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor.

However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much
easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example,
photography techniques.

Yes, because photography techniques require work and real learning,
along with getting off one's duff and *doing something*, while
features of equipment requires rote memorization.

And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music
or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion
may not go anywhere.

True. However, it seems to me that more might be learned if people
talked about attempts they've made, the trouble they found in trying
it that way, the results they got, and what they learned. Certainly,
there are those who do this. But there are far more that talk about
FPS, MP, VR, etc. and perhaps more importantly, why one brand's
versions of these things are better than another. As if these things
existed in a vacuum.

So in the end, it is quite possible that equipment oriented forums will
see the most activity.

Yes, definitely.

Same goes for many of the musician forums. People talk about
instruments, amplifiers, effects, types of wood, types of strings,
types of rosin, types of varnish, etc. And then the discussions about
how to PLAY the instruments are anemic by comparison. Again, there are
those who do discuss the techniques, but not nearly in the same
numbers.

My point was that all these things are related and perhaps in the Hi
Fi circles, we see the most fanatical. But this type of general
behavior is widespread and seems to cover just about any area where
art and technology meet.

-Karl

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

In article .com,
Karl Winkler wrote:
Same goes for many of the musician forums. People talk about
instruments, amplifiers, effects, types of wood, types of strings,
types of rosin, types of varnish, etc. And then the discussions about
how to PLAY the instruments are anemic by comparison. Again, there are
those who do discuss the techniques, but not nearly in the same
numbers.

My point was that all these things are related and perhaps in the Hi
Fi circles, we see the most fanatical. But this type of general
behavior is widespread and seems to cover just about any area where
art and technology meet.

On an audio or Hi-Fi group surely the discussion should be about things
technical, although plenty seem to look down their noses and say it should
be about music - despite there being countless groups specifically for
that.

--
*(on a baby-size shirt) "Party -- my crib -- two a.m

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

In article .com,
Karl Winkler wrote:
However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker
placement, acoustical treatments, etc.

How you expect that to work? "Where do I place speakers in my almost, but
not quite square room?"

But instead, they talk mostly
about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like
with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and
brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor.

So you think that talking about speaker placement or acoustical treatments
is much better use of ones time then talking about minute difference between
hifi equipment?

However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much
easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example,
photography techniques.

Yes, because photography techniques require work and real learning,
along with getting off one's duff and *doing something*, while
features of equipment requires rote memorization.

No, just pointing a photo camera and pressing the button is much less
work than listing the rather heavy high-end hifi equipment.

And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music
or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion
may not go anywhere.

True. However, it seems to me that more might be learned if people
talked about attempts they've made, the trouble they found in trying
it that way, the results they got, and what they learned.

But how does that help? In talking about selecting hifi equipment or
about photography is is hard work to come up with general principles, and
most of those are already covered in books about the subject.

"What I did to take this picture", or "the hifi equipment I had in the past",
just isn't likely to stimulate discussion.

Just saying 'brand X' is best, is guaranteed to generate fireworks.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 8, 9:08 am, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article .com,
Karl Winkler wrote:

Same goes for many of the musician forums. People talk about
instruments, amplifiers, effects, types of wood, types of strings,
types of rosin, types of varnish, etc. And then the discussions about
how to PLAY the instruments are anemic by comparison. Again, there are
those who do discuss the techniques, but not nearly in the same
numbers.
My point was that all these things are related and perhaps in the Hi
Fi circles, we see the most fanatical. But this type of general
behavior is widespread and seems to cover just about any area where
art and technology meet.

On an audio or Hi-Fi group surely the discussion should be about things
technical, although plenty seem to look down their noses and say it should
be about music - despite there being countless groups specifically for
that.

Well, there are technical things then there are technical things. I'm
not sure how useful it is to endlessly argue about one capacitor
dielectric vs. another one, although of course there are times for
such discussions. I just think that the OP's point is interesting, and
there is ample evidence pointing to what he is saying.

-Karl

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 8, 9:31 am, (Philip Homburg) wrote:
In article .com,

Karl Winkler wrote:
However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker
placement, acoustical treatments, etc.

How you expect that to work? "Where do I place speakers in my almost, but
not quite square room?"

Why not?

But instead, they talk mostly
about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like
with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and
brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor.

So you think that talking about speaker placement or acoustical treatments
is much better use of ones time then talking about minute difference between
hifi equipment?

Not necessarily - only that it's interesting in that the discussions
are so lopsided in favor of minutiae rather than information and
discussions most people can use.

However, my guess is that for the technically inclined people it is much
easier to talk about features of equipment than to talk about, for example,
photography techniques.

Yes, because photography techniques require work and real learning,
along with getting off one's duff and *doing something*, while
features of equipment requires rote memorization.

No, just pointing a photo camera and pressing the button is much less
work than listing the rather heavy high-end hifi equipment.

I assume you meant "lifting"? Sure it's easier. But what of it? Is it
easier to create a photograph that people would want to look at than
to just turn on your audio system?

And even if the participants know the concepts to discuss a piece of music
or a photograph, there is such a wide range in tastes, that a discussion
may not go anywhere.

True. However, it seems to me that more might be learned if people
talked about attempts they've made, the trouble they found in trying
it that way, the results they got, and what they learned.

But how does that help? In talking about selecting hifi equipment or
about photography is is hard work to come up with general principles, and
most of those are already covered in books about the subject.

Perhaps, but the drawback of books is that in terms of the technology,
they are usually out of date. Not only that, but the style of
photographs is also out of date. Yes, general principals are well
covered in the books and anyone desiring to learn more about the craft
has a wealth of information from which to learn. But discussions are
different because they are interactive and there may be the
opportunity to hear from someone who has encountered your specific
situation or knows about what you are trying to accomplish.

"What I did to take this picture", or "the hifi equipment I had in the past",
just isn't likely to stimulate discussion.

Maybe not - but that's the core of this thread isn't it? Why aren't
those topics likely to generate discussion?

Just saying 'brand X' is best, is guaranteed to generate fireworks.

Of course, but why?

-Karl

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 8, 1:30 pm, "Karl Winkler" wrote:

Not necessarily - only that it's interesting in that the discussions
are so lopsided in favor of minutiae rather than information and
discussions most people can use.

Karl:

You are taking the romance out of the hobby. The OP is clearly
trolling for a fight as well as stating the common perceptions dressed
up in the authoritative clothing of "A psychologist's view..." But the
perceptions stated are entirely anecdotal. Also typical of the species
(both psychologists and trolls).
_________________________________

Information people can use? Try this:

After some pretty basic parameters are met, there is not a whole
helluva lot to choose between amplifiers, pre-amplifiers, tuners, or
other forms of electronics.

*All* other things being equal, more power is always better than less
power.

Speakers are the weakest link in any system. Effort and attention
expended on speakers will pay off infinitely more than equal efforts
and attention spent on electronics.

Only you are the final judge of any given system.
Said system can only be judge in your listening area with your choice
of material.

After some pretty basic parameters are met, any given CD player is as
good as any other given CD player.

After some pretty basic parameters are met, a good antenna will do
more for your reception (AM or FM) than a fancy tuner. NO tuner can
overcome the limitations of a poor antenna. An excellent antenna can
put most tuners (after said parameters are met) on a near-as-much-as-
matters equal footing. NO tuner will correct bad information coming
in. Good antennas are cheaper than excellent tuners, however not every
location will permit a good antenna. So there is always a reason to
search for the very best tuner one can afford as long as the
limitations are fully understood.

Vinyl is the last true realm of black-magic in audio. The most costly
item in any vinyl system is the vinyl, so the primary attention should
be on protecting it. As it happens, systems good at protecting vinyl
typically do a fair job of reproduction as well. As with speakers,
care, time and attention here has a disproportionately positive
result. As with everything else, only you can judge the results.

After a certain point, improvements are inaudible. Only you can
determine that point.

If it seems not to make any sense, it likely does not improve sound
either.

If it cannot be explained in simple terms and with less than 20 words,
it likely does not improve sound either. Not the details, but the
concept. Codicil: Terms describing similar items should be common to
both descriptions.

If you like it and continue to like it, that is entirely enough.

Expense does not equal quality. Quality is not necessarily expensive.
Codicil A: $1000, some patience, care and attention and a modicum of
pure blind luck will net a better system from eBay, flea-markets and/
or garage sales than from your local high-end shop at 5 x that number.
Exceptions are anything that touches vinyl unless you are a good
technician, and cartridges and stylii nearly always. Codicil B: After
a certain point, increases in quality are at the inverse square to the
increase in cost. That is, the cost curve goes nearly straight up to a
gently sloping nearly linear quality curve.

Many things such as speaker placement, room treatments and similar
items are ultimately only for you to decide.

If you are given advice, you don't have to follow it. If you seek
advice, at least try it, but you still do not have to follow it to the
end of time.

You have the right to change your mind. Always. And for no reason at
all.

If you are not having fun/enjoying the hobby STOP. This isn't a
fetish, after all.
______________________________

Information that can be used, based on my experience. As it is only
based on my experience, it is limited in utility and not to be taken
as holy writ, endowed with great (any) authority or much more than a
vaguely humorous reply to your post.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

In article .com,
"Peter Wieck" wrote:

After some pretty basic parameters are met, a good antenna will do
more for your reception (AM or FM) than a fancy tuner. NO tuner can
overcome the limitations of a poor antenna. An excellent antenna can
put most tuners (after said parameters are met) on a near-as-much-as-
matters equal footing. NO tuner will correct bad information coming
in. Good antennas are cheaper than excellent tuners, however not every
location will permit a good antenna. So there is always a reason to
search for the very best tuner one can afford as long as the
limitations are fully understood.

This idea is not entirely true with regards to tuners. One problem that
a tuner with specs beyond those of "some pretty basic parameters" can
correct, that the best antenna can't correct is the reception of distant
stations with strong local adjacent channel stations on the same compass
heading. Another problem that "some pretty basic parameters" are not
likely protect against are 3rd order RF IM problems in the front end of
the tuner which make reception of certain distant stations impossible, a
better antenna often makes matters worse in this situation.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

On Mar 8, 2:33 pm, John Byrns wrote:
In article .com,

This idea is not entirely true with regards to tuners. One problem that
a tuner with specs beyond those of "some pretty basic parameters" can
correct, that the best antenna can't correct is the reception of distant
stations with strong local adjacent channel stations on the same compass
heading. Another problem that "some pretty basic parameters" are not
likely protect against are 3rd order RF IM problems in the front end of
the tuner which make reception of certain distant stations impossible, a
better antenna often makes matters worse in this situation.

Trust you, John, to go there.

"Pretty basic parameters" would include (at least) 3 & 4 gang tuning
systems (or electronic equivalents) able to deal with the above
issues. So, for instance, a Dynaco FM-5 (or AF-6) would not meet those
parameters, whereas a Revox A720 (which is also a creditable pre-amp)
does. As would lots of Kenwoods, Sansuis, any number of Sanyos, of
course Accuphase. Harmon-Kardon, Pioneer, and others come up as well.
Even latter-day Marantz & McIntosh tuners after the "legendary" tube
stuff.

Tube tuners are different beasts and problematic, as the Marantz 10B
is prone to exactly the problems you describe with or without a good
antenna. The Dynaco FM-3 does barely OK, but perhaps better than its
SS descendents, and not as well as the 10B. Some Scotts and Fishers do
better than both. If one must have tubes.

So, with patience, care and attention, a reasonable tuner should be
doable for less than $400. With luck less than $200. Certainly less
than the going rate for a 10B for better performance. Spend the rest
of the tuner-allocated $$ on that antenna. Make sure it has a rotator,
of course.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

A few things here - I hope it's clear that this implies "one
psychologists view" and not "the view of psychology". Second, HiFi
devotees and music lovers are not a binary. Third, fetishism is only
one of several hooks to hang this particular hat on, others being
creativity and obsessional behaviour. The statements are so
generalised I'd like to know more about the author's background in
psychology. He doesn't seem to be following the thread as far as I can
see - maybe he's just lobbed a grenade over the wall. I suspect this
may also be a post from somebody with a different identity.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
oups.com...
A few things here - I hope it's clear that this implies "one
psychologists view" and not "the view of psychology". Second, HiFi
devotees and music lovers are not a binary. Third, fetishism is only
one of several hooks to hang this particular hat on, others being
creativity and obsessional behaviour. The statements are so
generalised I'd like to know more about the author's background in
psychology. He doesn't seem to be following the thread as far as I can
see - maybe he's just lobbed a grenade over the wall. I suspect this
may also be a post from somebody with a different identity.


I hope you noted that the article is from the early '80's....so far as I can
tell this was just a troll. Moreover, RAP has very little to do with
audiophile obsession.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

Phil is a very lonely man, extremely intelligent and knowledgeable, but
unable to make people like him. His need for intellectual stimulation is in
conflict with his revulsion for human contact.

"roughplanet" wrote in message
...
"TT" wrote in message
...

"roughplanet" wrote in message
...
:
: If you believe that Phil Allison is a member of anyone on aus.hi-fi's
circle
: of friends, either you don't know him very well or the circle you're
: referring to has a diameter of 1 mm or less.
: Mark's reply was in fact, quite succinct, as Philthy has used the term
: 'Nazi' to describe almost everyone on this newsgroup at some time or
other,
: and so, by now, ought to be an expert on the subject.

I wish to invoke Godwin's Law ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law

BTW it's directed at you Ruff BUT the first person who
mentioned it i.e. Philthy.

How appropriate. Godwin must know Philthy pretty well :-).

ruff

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

In article ,
Mark wrote:
Phil is a very lonely man,

Now there's a statement of the obvious. ;-)

--
*I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

In article .com,
Karl Winkler wrote:
On Mar 8, 9:31 am, (Philip Homburg) wrote:
In article .com,

Karl Winkler wrote:
However, they could discuss the way the gear is set up, i.e. speaker
placement, acoustical treatments, etc.

How you expect that to work? "Where do I place speakers in my almost, but
not quite square room?"

Why not?

Okay, please tell me.

But instead, they talk mostly
about the gear from the standpoint of religious fanaticism. Just like
with politics. I think it's interesting that religion, politics and
brands are often discussed with the same level of fervor.

So you think that talking about speaker placement or acoustical treatments
is much better use of ones time then talking about minute difference between
hifi equipment?

Not necessarily - only that it's interesting in that the discussions
are so lopsided in favor of minutiae rather than information and
discussions most people can use.

For discussion, people have to disagree. For FAQs, it is much better to have
web-site.

No, just pointing a photo camera and pressing the button is much less
work than listing the rather heavy high-end hifi equipment.

I assume you meant "lifting"? Sure it's easier. But what of it? Is it
easier to create a photograph that people would want to look at than
to just turn on your audio system?

So? Most people think their pictures are great (especially if they have
high-end cameras).

So taking pictures is slightly more difficult than playing a record, but
not much (in some sense, properly adjusting a turntable takes a lot more
technical knowledge than just pressing the shutter release on an
auto-everything camera).

But how does that help? In talking about selecting hifi equipment or
about photography is is hard work to come up with general principles, and
most of those are already covered in books about the subject.

Perhaps, but the drawback of books is that in terms of the technology,
they are usually out of date.

What revolution in speaker placement did I miss?

But discussions are
different because they are interactive and there may be the
opportunity to hear from someone who has encountered your specific
situation or knows about what you are trying to accomplish.

If a photography technique problem is common enough that other people
already solved it, there is a very good chance that some textbook will
provide the hints you need to solve it.

Of course, expert can critique other people pictures. But that doesn't work
very well for various reasons.

In comparison, discussing equipment is much easier, so that is what people
do. (If you are an expert in photography, you are probably out taking
pictures, instead of looking at pictures that contain loads of mistakes that
are mentioned in every textbook.

"What I did to take this picture", or "the hifi equipment I had in the past",
just isn't likely to stimulate discussion.

Maybe not - but that's the core of this thread isn't it? Why aren't
those topics likely to generate discussion?

Because most people don't care as much. And you need a very good author (who
is also an accomplished photographer) to get something worth reading about the
background of his photos. So most people can't really participate.

Just saying 'brand X' is best, is guaranteed to generate fireworks.

Of course, but why?

Because my car is better than you car. That's just the it works.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

Do you know all that stuff for fact or is it a characterisation?

As a characterisation, it may be a little over the top! ...but don't let me
stop you.

The only thing I object to is any derogatory allusion to his source of
income. If Phil is suffering from chronic clinical depression, as I suspect
he is, he deserves financial support. The alternatives are worse!

As a pensioned disabled carer, the only source of income I have is from that
pension and the only thing that keeps me happy and is music, glorious music.

The same goes for my dependant, who is bed ridden. I've built him his own
remote controlled Hi-Fi and entertainment system sitting at the end of his
bed. The necessity to do so on a small income is what compels me towards
DIY.




"TT" wrote in message
...

"Mark" wrote in message
...
Phil is a very lonely man,

Except he voices in his head keep him company ;-)

extremely intelligent

Intelligent maybe but NOT smart. A classic example is when
he paid A$4,500 for a dud set of Quad ESL 57s. Here is the
all time Quad expert making a complete fool of himself :-))
It is a very funny story. BTW just as Pavlov trained dogs I
have trained Philthy. The mere mention of this will get him
to trot it all out again - just wait ;-)

and knowledgeable, but

Yes he uses Google very well and this can feign knowledge
easily ;-)

unable to make people like him.

This has something to do with his strict Catholic upbringing
and his repressed homosexual tendencies.

His need for intellectual stimulation is in

The word you are looking for here is "Ego". This needs to
be constantly fed. e.g. just mention to him you have *any*
formal qualification (even a swimming certificate or drivers
license) and just see what happens let a alone a Uni degree.
Philthy has *NO* qualifications at all! Period. He does not
even have a driver's license. He is a failure at everything
he tried and even quit 2 years into a university degree that
was fully funded by a scholarship.

conflict with his revulsion for human contact.

That is because every human he comes in contact with is
sickened by him.

So Mark do we need to mention he is also a net stalking,
libelling, unemployed, backyard tinkerer who tries to fix
various pieces of domestic appliances on his kitchen table
as well? ;-) Or the fact that the only reason why his sorry
arse has not been dragged through the courts already for
defamation is that he has *NO* assets. He pretends to have
an income from his hobby "fix it" business he runs from his
rundown rented bed-sit when he is obviously receiving some
sort of govt. hand out.

The truth is this guy is nothing but a very sad, lonely old
man who is a total failure at life and is really something
to be pitied.

Regards TT (a past victim of this psycho)

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Mark" wrote in message
...
Phil is a very lonely man,

Except he voices in his head keep him company ;-)

extremely intelligent

Intelligent maybe but NOT smart. A classic example is when
he paid A$4,500 for a dud set of Quad ESL 57s. Here is the
all time Quad expert making a complete fool of himself :-))
It is a very funny story. BTW just as Pavlov trained dogs I
have trained Philthy. The mere mention of this will get him
to trot it all out again - just wait ;-)

and knowledgeable, but

Yes he uses Google very well and this can feign knowledge
easily ;-)

unable to make people like him.

This has something to do with his strict Catholic upbringing
and his repressed homosexual tendencies.

His need for intellectual stimulation is in

The word you are looking for here is "Ego". This needs to
be constantly fed. e.g. just mention to him you have *any*
formal qualification (even a swimming certificate or drivers
license) and just see what happens let a alone a Uni degree.
Philthy has *NO* qualifications at all! Period. He does not
even have a driver's license. He is a failure at everything
he tried and even quit 2 years into a university degree that
was fully funded by a scholarship.

conflict with his revulsion for human contact.

That is because every human he comes in contact with is
sickened by him.

So Mark do we need to mention he is also a net stalking,
libelling, unemployed, backyard tinkerer who tries to fix
various pieces of domestic appliances on his kitchen table
as well? ;-) Or the fact that the only reason why his sorry
arse has not been dragged through the courts already for
defamation is that he has *NO* assets. He pretends to have
an income from his hobby "fix it" business he runs from his
rundown rented bed-sit when he is obviously receiving some
sort of govt. hand out.

The truth is this guy is nothing but a very sad, lonely old
man who is a total failure at life and is really something
to be pitied.

Regards TT (a past victim of this psycho)

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Mark" wrote in message
...
Do you know all that stuff for fact or is it a
characterisation?

I'll start at the beginning. Philthy here has a hobby
business and as such under Australian taxation law is not
registered for GST which means his turnover is less than
A$50,000 per year. Where he lives and the rents he would
paying makes for a very meagre lifestyle if this was his
only income. Remember we are talking turnover not profit
here. So it is an "educated guess" yes.

see http://tinyurl.com/3bfrze

As a characterisation, it may be a little over the top!
....but don't let me
stop you.

Please remember that I and several of my friends in business
here have had this guy has *PAY* for company searches on
our businesses and then he has proceeded to malign and libel
anyone else attached to those businesses in cluding family
members.

The only thing I object to is any derogatory allusion to
his source of
income. If Phil is suffering from chronic clinical
depression, as I suspect
he is, he deserves financial support. The alternatives are
worse!

I have no objection to Philthy receiving government
assistance *except* he needs to forced to keep on his
medications and/or institutionalised without internet
access! Also please do not misunderstand my intention here,
I am not in anyway belittling anyone who genuinely needs
support *BUT* I am having a shot at Philthy who constantly
carries on as if he is a grand entrepreneur and has a
thriving electronics business.

As you have no doubt seen he is constantly having a shot at
*anyone* that has a mere glimmer of success attached to them
and if in doubt please do a Google Groups search?

As a pensioned disabled carer, the only source of income I
have is from that
pension and the only thing that keeps me happy and is
music, glorious music.

My sincerest sympathies here and am very pleased you can
find happiness in music. I believe in genuine cases as
yourself the social services are in no way doing enough to
help and support people in your situation. I only have a
problem with people recieving benefits they are not entitled
to.

BTW do a Google Groups search on philthy's name and
"Autistic" http://tinyurl.com/ysnxme

I also apologise in advance for the potential distress you
may have in reading Philthy's posts in that link.

I make it 836! So please tell me how much he really cares
for the sufferes of this condition or the people engaged in
their care? Or the numerous times he has told people to
"get cancer and die"? I personally find it very difficult
to to feel any sympathy for this sad little man and no
hardship is too bad to befall him.



The same goes for my dependant, who is bed ridden. I've
built him his own
remote controlled Hi-Fi and entertainment system sitting
at the end of his
bed. The necessity to do so on a small income is what
compels me towards
DIY.

There will be enornous amout of good quality second hand
gear coming on the market as manufacturers push for ever
more featured gizmos ;-) Just think what a Playstation 2
will be worth in about 2 weeks ;-) As entertainment box
with networking abilty, DVD/CD replay and a HD it may be
something to think about perhaps.


So finally Mark if I have offended you in any way please
accept my apology as it was not my intention to disparage
anyone except Philthy.

Cheers TT

A psychologist's view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"TT" wrote in message
...

"Mark" wrote in message
...
Do you know all that stuff for fact or is it a
characterisation?

I'll start at the beginning. Philthy here has a hobby
business and as such under Australian taxation law is not
registered for GST which means his turnover is less than
A$50,000 per year. Where he lives and the rents he would
paying makes for a very meagre lifestyle if this was his
only income. Remember we are talking turnover not profit
here. So it is an "educated guess" yes.

see http://tinyurl.com/3bfrze

As a characterisation, it may be a little over the top!
...but don't let me
stop you.

Please remember that I and several of my friends in business
here have had this guy has *PAY* for company searches on
our businesses and then he has proceeded to malign and libel
anyone else attached to those businesses in cluding family
members.

The only thing I object to is any derogatory allusion to
his source of
income. If Phil is suffering from chronic clinical
depression, as I suspect
he is, he deserves financial support. The alternatives are
worse!

I have no objection to Philthy receiving government
assistance *except* he needs to forced to keep on his
medications and/or institutionalised without internet
access! Also please do not misunderstand my intention here,
I am not in anyway belittling anyone who genuinely needs
support *BUT* I am having a shot at Philthy who constantly
carries on as if he is a grand entrepreneur and has a
thriving electronics business.

As you have no doubt seen he is constantly having a shot at
*anyone* that has a mere glimmer of success attached to them
and if in doubt please do a Google Groups search?

As a pensioned disabled carer, the only source of income I
have is from that
pension and the only thing that keeps me happy and is
music, glorious music.

My sincerest sympathies here and am very pleased you can
find happiness in music. I believe in genuine cases as
yourself the social services are in no way doing enough to
help and support people in your situation. I only have a
problem with people recieving benefits they are not entitled
to.

BTW do a Google Groups search on philthy's name and
"Autistic" http://tinyurl.com/ysnxme

I also apologise in advance for the potential distress you
may have in reading Philthy's posts in that link.

I make it 836! So please tell me how much he really cares
for the sufferes of this condition or the people engaged in
their care? Or the numerous times he has told people to
"get cancer and die"? I personally find it very difficult
to to feel any sympathy for this sad little man and no
hardship is too bad to befall him.



The same goes for my dependant, who is bed ridden. I've
built him his own
remote controlled Hi-Fi and entertainment system sitting
at the end of his
bed. The necessity to do so on a small income is what
compels me towards
DIY.

There will be enornous amout of good quality second hand
gear coming on the market as manufacturers push for ever
more featured gizmos ;-) Just think what a Playstation 2
will be worth in about 2 weeks ;-) As entertainment box
with networking abilty, DVD/CD replay and a HD it may be
something to think about perhaps.


So finally Mark if I have offended you in any way please
accept my apology as it was not my intention to disparage
anyone except Philthy.

Cheers TT


Mark,

Everything Terry has said is the truth. If anything I think he has painted
an optimist's view of Phil and tried to see the positive side of him.

For years I've been a victim of Phil. First it was just a fax message to my
workplace, then numerous posts all over various newsgroups claiming I'm a
sex tourist and a paedophile. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Then came the harassment on Usenet of my business partner. Phil published
his personal details all over several newsgroups and still got it wrong by
not ensuring the so called "facts" were indeed up to date. He published
links to our website making all sorts of unfounded accusations about the
nature of our business..

Next he had someone do several visits to my home. Phil reporting on Usenet
enough detailed information such as my address, what was growing in my front
garden behind a brick wall etc to be convincing enough he had someone
stalking me. Bear in mind I live in Perth - Phil lives in Sydney. Anyone
going to this extreme to get some else to spy on someone thousands of
kilometres away has (IMHO) some serious unresolved issues. In short the guy
is a crackpot. As Terry has said, perhaps to be pitied, but IMHO he's
positively dangerous. Stalking today - more serious crime tomorrow.

All you need to do to get Phil's undivided attention is to openly disagree
with something he has posted on UseNet. Doesn't matter what it is about.
Within three posts in a thread you will be accused of being a "****wit",
quickly followed by all manner of abuse. Then if you are really unlucky you
may start to receive the same degree of unwanted attention some of us have
had to endure. The above examples are but merely a small sample of what
Phil is capable of. :-(

Cheers,
Alan

A psychologist\'s view of Hi-Fi fetishism
 

"Alan Rutlidge" wrote
in message
...
All you need to do to get Phil\'s undivided attention is to
openly disagree
with something he has posted on UseNet. Doesn\'t matter
what it is about.
Within three posts in a thread you will be accused of
being a "****wit",
quickly followed by all manner of abuse. Then if you are
really unlucky you
may start to receive the same degree of unwanted attention
some of us have
had to endure. The above examples are but merely a small
sample of what
Phil is capable of. :-(

Cheers,
Alan

Sad but very true :-(

BTW I was actually surprised at the search results of
"autistic" as well. I know he used it often but 836 times!

This is one sick puppy we\'re dealing with here :-(.

Cheers TT